Lutjens in Austin...

Anything about the crew, families, origins, etc.
yellowtail3
Senior Member
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:50 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Lutjens in Austin...

Post by yellowtail3 » Fri Aug 06, 2010 6:50 pm

Surfing around the web, found a reference to Lutjens visiting my hometown of Austin during cruise of the Karlsruhe.

http://tinyurl.com/3x3zb7w
http://www.tamu.edu/ccbn/dewitt/adp/arc ... /nazi.html
In late April 1935, Karlsruhe was on its homeward end of the cruise when the cruiser made its stop at Houston. It remained there for over a week. Lutjens, the crew and cadets took advantage of the stop to visit various spots in Texas. Lutjens himself went to Austin, visited with Governor James V. Allred and spoke to a joint session of the Texas Legislature.
So interesting; one of Gov. Allred's sons was my neighbor growing up, and his daughter taught me to ride. Six degrees of separation...
Shift Colors... underway.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7532
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Lutjens in Austin...

Post by RF » Wed Aug 25, 2010 8:52 am

These are interesting articles.

As they themselves mention, the visits came at a time before the full racist poicies of the Third Riech were given official government sanction, and also when the crew of the Karlsruhe would not have been indoctrinated to the extent of the people at home in Germany.
The articles don't mention that Lutjens himself had Jewish ancestry, and did protest through Raeder at the anti-Jewish pogrom in November 1938, the Krystallnacht.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Lutjens in Austin...

Post by lwd » Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:32 pm

My impression from other readings has been that the KM managed to keep itself a part from some of the more hatefull of the Nazi policies. Navies in general seem to result in more generalized feelings for the "home land" and less for idealogies and policies of sub groups (or maybe the people who join them are more inclined that way. A similar strain can be seen in the ACW where far fewer naval officers ellected to join the Confederacy in comparison to those in the army.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7532
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Lutjens in Austin...

Post by RF » Thu Aug 26, 2010 8:17 am

With respect to ACW would it not be the case that proportionally more naval officers came from the northern Atlantic states than from the south than with the Army? As the south was closer to the areas of south western expansion and the conflicts with Mexico much of the Army would be drawn from the south rather than from the north?

Another case in respect of navies being less extreme politically might be the IJN, even though they were the instrument of attack at PH and some of its personnel were involved later on in the war in the commission of war crimes.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Lutjens in Austin...

Post by lwd » Thu Aug 26, 2010 1:23 pm

RF wrote:With respect to ACW would it not be the case that proportionally more naval officers came from the northern Atlantic states than from the south than with the Army? As the south was closer to the areas of south western expansion and the conflicts with Mexico much of the Army would be drawn from the south rather than from the north?
I didn't express it clearly enough. The percentage of Southern born army officers who sided with the confederacy was much higher than the percentage of Southern born naval officers who did.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7532
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Lutjens in Austin...

Post by RF » Thu Aug 26, 2010 6:43 pm

lwd, as a matter of interest, are you able to say what the actual proportion of naval officers coming from the eleven Confederate states who stayed in the Federal Navy was?
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Lutjens in Austin...

Post by lwd » Mon Aug 30, 2010 8:53 pm

I don't have the numbers at hand. I remember reading it in a history some years ago (probably 20+) but don't remember which one. It may have only been officers above a certain rank as well.
If we look at admirals Farragagut was from Tenn, and stayed with the Union as did Rear Admiral William B. Shubrick.

Buchanan became a Confedereate admiral after attaining the rank of Captain in the USN.
Semmes was a USN Comander who ended up as a Confederate admiral.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:C ... y_officers
links to pages on the above two plus 4 of 5 captains who had prior service in the USN as well as 10 or 12 commanders.

Of coures none of this addresses just how many southern USN officers stayed with the Union.
This book may provide some detail: http://www.brettschulte.net/CWBlog/2010 ... civil-war/

This page may be of some use: http://thomaslegion.net/list_of_us_navy ... l_war.html
In table 3 it lists 16% of USN Captains as "going South if I'm reading it right.
27% of Commanders. 25% Liutenatnts although a pretty large number of Acting Midshipmen 42%. 3 of the 15 Captains don't appear to have entered Confederate service however. Still doesn't give us how many born in the South stayed with the Union.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7532
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Lutjens in Austin...

Post by RF » Thu Sep 02, 2010 5:56 pm

An interesting set of figures. One thought that occurs to me is of how far these southern officers stayed with the USN out of loyalty to an existing service they were in, or a cold calculation of who the winning side would be, or genuine disagreement with secession.

Going back to Lutjens he certainly displayed absolute loyalty to a service of a country whose racial policies, from the available circumstantial evidence, he disagreed with.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Lutjens in Austin...

Post by lwd » Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:29 pm

One of the reasons I brought up the ACW was that the original document I read suggested long cruises, which were characteristic of the time, tended to result in the officers and crew developing a loyalty to the "nation" as opposed to political parties or figures or cities or states. Ie they came to think of themselvs as Americans rather than Democrats of Virginians in the case of the ACW. This may have had a similar effect on the Kriegsmarine where they thought of themselves as Germans and felt their loyalty to Germany rather than the German government or the Nazi's. It was thus their duty to remain loyal to Germany inspite of rather than because of the poliices of the Nazi government. I've even read that there remained a fair number of Jews in the KM through out the war for instance.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7532
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Lutjens in Austin...

Post by RF » Fri Sep 03, 2010 8:07 am

The KM of course is well known for being the least ''nazi'' of the Third Reich's military forces. largely due to the nature of the service with its external wordly links, but also because Raeder kept the Nazi Party and the SS out of its ranks.

I would have thought the US in 1860 would be different in that individual states had their own identity and loyalties, set apart from the concept of a US itself. This is how the southern states were able to individually secede, especially as some of them such as Texas had already existed as separate countries prior to joining the Union.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

Leatherneck
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:11 am

Re: Lutjens in Austin...

Post by Leatherneck » Sat Sep 04, 2010 4:50 am

RF wrote:An interesting set of figures. One thought that occurs to me is of how far these southern officers stayed with the USN out of loyalty to an existing service they were in, or a cold calculation of who the winning side would be, or genuine disagreement with secession.

Going back to Lutjens he certainly displayed absolute loyalty to a service of a country whose racial policies, from the available circumstantial evidence, he disagreed with.
Don't forget that career interest may have played a factor as well. With the Federal Navy having more ships, there were more oportunities for command and advancement.

Off topic (somewhat): I used to live in Willoughby Spit, Norfolk, VA. Right down the street from our old house is the historical marker for the battle of the Monitor & Merrimack. A few hundred feet further is the marker for the birth of U.S. carrier aviation (USS Langley). And, a mile east is a marker for a now gone hotel where Operation Torch was planned.

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1623
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Lutjens in Austin...

Post by wadinga » Sun Dec 05, 2010 11:44 pm

All,

Before Lutjens made it to the Alamo (And the tinyurl link on the lead page takes you to a photo of his officers giving the Nazi salute in honour of the Alamo's dead) he was in Canada.

Here http://www.cnrs-scrn.org/northern_marin ... 2_1-13.pdf you can read an excellent paper on the visit.

RF has said
As they themselves mention, the visits came at a time before the full racist poicies of the Third Riech were given official government sanction, and also when the crew of the Karlsruhe would not have been indoctrinated to the extent of the people at home in Germany.
Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_pol ... zi_Germany points out that racist laws started being emplaced immediately Hitler took over as Chancellor.

It is clear that the ship was on a public relations tour for the Nazi state with a completely trusted Commander in charge.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7532
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Lutjens in Austin...

Post by RF » Tue Dec 07, 2010 9:39 am

wadinga, read my post and the Wikipaedia article again. There is no conflict between my post and what Wikipaedia says.

The actions taken in 1933 were sponsored by the NSDAP and SA and not formally by the state itself. Only in 1935 with the passing of the Nuremburg Laws were anti-semitism state as opposed to party led.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1623
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: Lutjens in Austin...

Post by wadinga » Tue Dec 07, 2010 10:53 pm

RF,

I have read them both, and I can't see how the Wikipedia supports your observation.

This is the paragraph immediately above the Nuremberg Laws:
On April 1, 1933, the Nazi boycott of Jewish businesses was observed throughout Germany. Only six days later, the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service was passed, banning Jews from government jobs. It is notable that the proponents of this law, and the several thousand more that were to follow, most frequently explained them as necessary to prevent the infiltration of damaging, "alien-type" (Artfremd) hereditary traits into the German national or racial community (Volksgemeinschaft).[5] These laws meant that Jews were now indirectly and directly dissuaded or banned from privileged and superior positions reserved for “Aryan Germans”. From then on, Jews were forced to work at more menial positions, becoming second-class citizens or to the point they were "illegally residing" in Nazi Germany.
OK it's not gassing people in their millions but it is a racially motivated Law passed by the new German government dominated by Hitler after the passing of the Enabling Act . The Trades Unions are abolished in May, all other political parties in July, Germany leaves the League of Nations in October and a one party election gives the NSDAP 92% of vote in November 1933.
The State governments are abolished in January 1934, Himmler becomes Chief of the Gestapo in April, Roehm and 70 other SA leaders are executed without trial in June, and Hindenburg dies in August allowing Hitler to meld Chancellor and President into Fuehrer. The Fuehrer then requires all members of the armed forces to swear a personal oath of loyalty to him. In September the Nuremburg Rally is convened and Triumph of the Will is filmed and Gunter Lutjens is given command of the Karlsruhe on a prestigious "flag-waving" cruise to various parts of the world. It is a promotion of the New Germany to counteract the negative press generated by the afore-mentioned events. As such it is a highly political appointment. Gunter Lutjens gets the job.

According to the Canadian accounts, the Fuehrer's portrait is given the Nazi salute upon entry to the Wardroom, and all Officers (including the Captain?) give the Nazi salute even when the British National anthem is played at events ashore.

Who would make policy in the Karlsruhe except its Commander?

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"

User avatar
tommy303
Senior Member
Posts: 1527
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:19 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: Lutjens in Austin...

Post by tommy303 » Wed Dec 08, 2010 1:03 am

It might be interesting to note, that the other good will cruise that year was that of the Emden, under command of Fregattenkapitaen Karl Doenitz. At the end of their cruises, the two ships sailed back to Germany, Doenitz to take up command of 1st U-Boat Flotilla, and Luetjens, the highly influential Naval Personnel Office which exercised control over officer selection.

Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
They stood and Earth's foundations stay;
What God abandoned these defended;
And saved the sum of things for pay.

Locked